To think this is out and out wrong and could have huge implications for an innocent person ?

[ApocalypseCheeseToastie]

A 19yr old man near me has been prosecuted for sexually harassing an underage girl (fair enough)

His father is a teacher/ head of year at the rather rough academy (he was also an old teacher of mine wayyyyy back)

For some reason the local rag NAMED the teacher, the school he worked at, occupation etc along with his son on the front bloody page. Is it just me or is that very wrong ? I can only imagine the impact it will have on his career and the hassle he will get off certain pupils.

I hope he sues the bottom out of their arseholes

Yes, this strikes me as unethical. His father is not responsible for his behaviour.

charliesmommy - You are making rather a lot of assumptions. Firstly, the girl did not go to 'running to the police', her family did. Also, nowhere does it mention her age. She could be a lot younger than 14/15.

Why do you feel she is to blame?

Naming the father (and where he works) is just wrong he is not to blame for the actions of another and for some reason there are so many stupid people in the world that they will add sexual harassment + prosecuted + Fathers name + works in school = The father is a pedo working in a school.

I realise it's not headline news and that this wasn't the original point of the post (tho I agree with Apocalypses point toally) but can people please not trot out the 'sexual harrassment isn't a big deal' line.

It is a big deal and often gets belittled.

The article reads as if the victim was a pupil at the father's school - hardly completely tenuous IMO.

Lots of local people will already know the connection anyway - they won't need the local paper to tell them.

And if the paper did not put that fact in then they would be plagued by lots of callers telling them about it and berating them for their lack of local knowledge and contacts......

As an ex reporter, yes I would have included that fact.

Janos, I didnt say she was to blame. I think it seems a very one sided report that doesnt fully explain the details. The girls age IS important. If she is under 13 then she shouldnt have been allowed on FB anyway, and her parents should hold some culpability if she was able to meet up with this young man.

I am sure most of us on here can identify with the behaviour of teenage girls older than 13.. they can, and often do, encourage llads, lead them on, and then panic if it gets out of hand. It is not always a cut and dried case of abuse, and I would say that would possibly apply to this article.

There's no excuse for not checking a girl's age if in any doubt.

It's also very sneaky, implying that there is a link between the father's access to young girls and the son's crime without actually coming out and saying it.

....Can't see that myself.

I do take your point charliesmommy. While I'm further away than I used to be from teenagerhood (mid thirties now) I recognise the sort of situation you describe.

We just can't make assumptions though. For starters, we don't know how old she is or what was said in the text. As he's being prosecuted I would guess he did something a lot worse than just make a smutty remark. We don't know though.

According to the report he sent one inappropriate text to her.

Articles like this really do annoy me, simply because that young lad is now going to be a target for vigilantes who do not know the full story.

It is one of the reasons I am against a Megans Law type register being freely available, as a teenage boy was shot in America after the villagers with their pitchforks went after him, simply because he was on the register.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/a-vigilantes-charter-the-bitter-legacy-of-megans-law-405254.html

Well, we don't know the full story.

But I wouldn't describe anyone who goes sending texts 'describing a sex act' (quote from the article) to young teenage girls as an innocent either.

Teeange girls might well behave inappropriately - that doesn't absolve adult men from responsible behaviour.

I agree, but having brought up a teenage boy, and remembering some of the girls who used to chase after him, believe me, you would not have thought they were underage.. it was worrying. Luckily he was sensible and only went out with girls who he knew for certain were over 16 when he was that age, and this was ten years ago now, before facebook. I can only imagine that facebook has made things even more complicated.

I have also seen some of the status's and comment that many underage girls make on their facebook pages... I am just glad our kids are now all in their twenties.

I did a story just after Sarah Payne- when the NoW decided to publish the sex offenders register- where some vigilante had posted leaflets across an estate, pointing 'the finger at a local father of three with the same name and area of residence as one of those on 'the register.

The poor guy had to have a police officer outside his door for a week.

I've never been convinced about the argument for 'Sarah's Law' - but that's another thread.

Muriel76 The article in no way reads as if the girl was at the school his dad works in there are 4 secondary schools in the area, she could have gone to any of them.

It's not very pleasant but it's certainly not illegal to name his dad in the paper.

Oh and he'd have no grounds whatsoever to sue as it's factually correct.

Have to differ on that one Apocalypse - that's exactly how it reads to me.

And you're right Cupcake it's not illegal or something they could sue for, unless the facts are wrong.

I wonder how old the girl is - is she turning 16 tomorrow?

I find it very scary that so many people on this thread assume that being prosecuted and convicted are one and the same thing.